Unsurprisingly, Neelu has jumped right on board. We say “unsurprisingly” because during Christine’s ill-fated trip to the UK in 2015, she and Neelu seemed to form a strong personal bond, and Christine has given over a section of her web page for Neelu’s use.

Oddly enough, during Rupert’s trial, Christine Ann Sands’ website figured rather prominently in the prosecution’s case. It seems that when Rupert’s computer was examined, “a Skype conversation between Sabine McNeill and the defendant was discovered, containing a link to the website http://www.hampsteadchristchurch.com. This site contained a link which contained the names of the five witnesses in this trial, as well as a reference to one of the witnesses being “constantly on the move”.

Whether Christine’s current attempt to take us down is linked to this, we really cannot say. However, the timing is certainly interesting.

What could possibly go wrong?

Before Christine and Neelu decided on this line of attack, it might have been a good plan to read the fine print.

First, there’s the question of copyright, and who owns it. We’re not aware of having made use of any copyrighted material from either Christine or Neelu, and when we’ve quoted them, we’ve always ensured that the attribution was clear.

As such, before submitting a DMCA notice, it’s important to consider if the manner in which the material is used falls under fair use. If you are not sure whether material located on a WordPress.com site infringes your copyright, or if it is subject to fair use protections, you should first consider seeking legal advice.

It’s that term “fair use” which ought to have rung an alarm bell or two in what passes for the brains of Christine and Neelu. WordPress offers this brief summary of how fair use rules apply to a blog like this:

There aren’t hard and fast rules when it comes to defining fair use. However, the Copyright Act sets out four factors for courts to consider:

The purpose and character of the use: Why and how is the material used? Using content for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research is usually fair. Additionally, using material in a transformative manner, that is to say, in a manner that adds new expression, meaning, or insight, is also more likely to be considered fair use over an exact reproduction of a work. What’s more, nonprofit use is favored over commercial use.

The nature of the copyrighted work: Is the original factual or fiction, published or unpublished? Factual and published works are less protected, so its use is more likely to be considered fair.

The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: How much of the material is used? If the “heart” (the most memorable or significant portion) or the majority of a work wasn’t used, it’s more likely to be considered fair.

The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work: Does the use target a different market/audience? If so, it’s more likely to be fair use. It’s important to note that although criticism or parody may reduce a market, it still may be fair because of its transformative nature. In other words, if the criticism of a product influences people to stop buying the product, that doesn’t count as having an “effect on the market for the work” under copyright law.

We think that if Christine and Neelu had been arsed to look into the concept of “fair use” a bit more closely, they might have discovered that in fact, their DMCA report could backfire horribly on them. WordPress notes that they have filed lawsuits against DMCA notices they consider fraudulent. Seems they’re not terribly keen on misuse of the DMCA process.

However, as we know, Christine and Neelu have never allowed mere facts to stand in the way of their deranged campaigns. We’ll look forward with some interest to the outcome of this one.

I would have thought there was another layer of complication here… The blog is published from within the United Kingdom? – And much (if not all) of the material claimed is originated in the United Kingdom? While the platform itself is American… Essentially the Blog is subject to English law – even the other territories of the UK are bound by the same act.

The US DMCA act cannot be enforced in the UK. So the actual notice and demand is completely invalid. the relevant law is the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 as amended.

…That’s quite apart from respective fair use and fair dealing doctrines (they’re subtly different) of US and UK legislations both of which would probably cover the criticism and review of this material. Then there is the fact that only the actual copyright owner (or their properly appointed owner) can file.

As far as WordPress are concerned (i.e. the only party here subject to the DMCA) one of the key features of that act is the exemption from direct and indirect liability of Internet service providers and other intermediaries. In Europe the Electronic Commerce Directive 2000 has a similar effect. – So there is no legal leverage that can be applied to WordPress – and all they’re obliged to do is pass on the notice which is, as I say, completely invalid.

Naturally I qualify all this by suggesting all parties speak to lawyers who are copyright specialists (Swann Turton are good) but I don’t think they’ll tell you anything I haven’t outlined here.

Thanks, Sir Henry–we know from bitter experience how difficult it can be to have WordPress blogs taken down. One of our first projects as a group was to attempt to have Charlotte Ward’s blog removed, on the basis that it was violating a long list of UK laws. We were told that this made no difference as far as WordPress was concerned; they would only accept complaints about blogs which were breaching US laws.

Obviously there’s a difference between that experience and this, but the intricacies of various bits of legislation and where they may apply on the internet is a field of law unto itself, it would seem.

Please note that we are a UK company and the material in question was published in the UK subject to he provisions of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. UK law does not have an equivalent provision to the DMCA and you are hereby put on notice that we are not subject to, nor do we recognise its provisions.

In the interests of protecting your alleged copyright holder we have advised the publisher of the material in question of your notice. However, under section 35 of the UK Data Protection Act of 1998, we cannot provide any additional information unless presented with a court order issues by a British court.”

Do not worry El Coyote your blog ain’t going nowhere! These sickos and Sados have nothing better to do than cause misery because they are miserable and horrible people. I also believe Neelu and Christine want this site taken down as it is one of a few that monitors and details their disgusting behaviour and warns others to stay well clear of these deranged and degenerate individuals who are corrupt and vulgar. The obsession with paedophilia and love of Freeman on the land anti-government and anti-decent law abiding society these two are for will make people see them for what they really are fraudsters and nasty bugs to get away from! Keep up the good work and don’t sweat it EC! We support you!

For anyone who missed it, this is Defective Costa’s screenshot, from which she has deduced that anyone who objects to their family being threatened must have kids at Christ Church School in Hampstead, London (because hey, they’re the only people in the World who have families, right):

I have of course forwarded Costa’s groundbreaking piece of journalism to the Pulitzer Prize committee. What with this and her amazing deduction that because UK Callum referred to his own hypothetical children in a comment he must be Ricky Dearman, she should have it nailed.

Of course, the irony of all the hoaxer twunts kicking off over Rupert’s conviction is that apart from Bellender, they’d all forgotten about him anyway and were blissfully unaware that he was standing trial until we told them. In fact, even after we’d told them, most of them couldn’t give a fuck. Angie and Bellender were the only ones who even mentioned it. But hey, there’s a bandwagon in town now – right, fruitcakes? All aboard! Toot toot…!

Believe it or not, it’s not all that uncommon for contracts relating to intellectual property to refer to ‘the universe’ and/or ‘extra terrestrial’ distribution – the fact that we routinely transmit from space being one of the factors that led to that happening.

It’s all my fault. I mention Sands and Berry in the last thread and like casting a spell to raise up Beelzebub they suddenly appear.

I’d be very proactive when it comes to these two creatures attempting to remove a website on false claims.

I’m STILL trying to have several websites hosted in Australia removed and talk about getting the runaround from Google- and this is after they have lost spectacularly in the courts. But they make you jump through so many hoops.

I’d go on the attack as the pair are fraudulently attempting to claim copyright. I’d do it so they both get a bad name with WordPress and it’s on the record.

The pair are obviously ignorant to how these DMCA notices work. The host company forwards the claim to the blog owner and if that blog owner says it’s a lie they then refer back to the claimant and ask them to provide proof of copyright ownership. In the US falsely claiming to own a copyright is considered fraud.
But the process takes so long it tends to eventually fizzle out anyway.

As for the odious Angela Power-Disney: I think it’s suddenly sinking in with the bitch that there could be severe ramifications with the jailing of Rupert Quaintance who she encouraged and partly funded to begin his quest.
Having her name mentioned in court in derogatory fashion could have consequences.

I’m pretty sure the entire Quaintance family must be fuming as to what has happened to Rupert and who is the root cause : APD. His life has changed for the worse in so many ways.
Even trying to get a job in these difficult days could be very hard for him. He’s at a difficult age approaching 40. Once a prospective employee hears he was jailed in the UK on serious harassment charges that involve innocent children you can be sure they’ll be saying “we’ll give you and call” and immediately look over his shoulder at the next 40 candidates in line.

Is any employer going to take a chance on employing a man jailed on a matter like this who also expresses in his infamous video : “I almost want to fuck a kid up the arse to see what it’s like”. Are they really going to allow such a person near customers in litigious USA?

As for Power Disney she is really an accident waiting to happen.
Rather than adopt a low profile and fade into the background until the dust settles, she’s goes on the attack. She now has a growing list of innocents who she has defamed and harassed. You can be sure there are many in Ireland and close by her who have been her victims who we may not know about.

As for Mad Moo, just fucking deranged as usual and Neelu Berry?. I hate the idea of someone being evicted but in her case I think it should happen and happen soon in dramatic fashion for no other reason that she will have more important things to think about rather than defaming innocent people.

“I’m pretty sure the entire Quaintance family must be fuming as to what has happened to Rupert and who is the root cause : APD. His life has changed for the worse in so many ways.”

As somebody else pointed out yesterday, Rupert can be found wallowing in conspiraloon rubbish as far back as 2012. Likewise all the pish about him being an expert drummer, an ‘international videographer’ and a journalist; all complete fantasies he drummed up for himself…

Career wise? He was basically a clerk in a hotel… A job that this middle-age loser only managed to hold down for five years. One of his main frustrations being that ‘college kids’ half his age were passing through the halls to real life and better things while he – having bummed around all his life – had reached his destination. Education? US ‘Bachelors degrees’ (as a rule) barely transcribe to HNC level – about one year at a British University or college. So this guy isn’t qualified for anything of note or to any significant level –

To throw that into perspective when we take ‘kids’ of 19 or 20 in here to train we ask for a minimum HND; and we’ll be moving them on to acquire an honours degree from there before they emerge as trained… The guy who runs the nearby garage tells me his guys are trained up to degree equivalence (there are formal frameworks that allow you to check and cross-reference this sort of thing). – A professional man in any field, approaching 40 should have degree equivalence and a host of other industry relevant qualifications – what does Rupert have?

A basic FE certificate and five years experience carrying people’s bags… 20 years out of school and that’s it!

APD is a bitch of hell and has much to answer for… But Rupert’s failure is all his own! And yes, I do blame the parents for indulging that.

What people often don’t understand about copyright it is it SUBsists (in much the same way as your fingers subsist as the result of your hand existing) as the result of a work in one of the eight classes coming into existence. i.e. Draw a doodle on a napkin and you own the copyright to it – providing of course it’s an original work and you haven’t just ripped off Homer Simpson or the like. Under the Berne convention you don’t even need to ‘register’ it or the like; you only need to prove that you are the author. In fact, in the UK there is not even a (legitimate) register of copyright material.

So, Neelu is perfectly entitled to lay claim to copyright in her ‘pharmacy report’ (the same one that got her struck off IIRC?) and fancifully named ‘professional’ witness statements. – It’s simply that EC has a very obvious defence under the fair-dealing provisions of the CDPA and that Neelu would need to go through a British court to assert her rights…

Now, that’s going to cost her money, quite a bit of it, we’re talking about a case that will end up in the High court here. – Then of course there is the troubling matter of much of her ‘work’ being derived from things that are, as you suggest, illegal, libellous, in contempt of court etc… All very interesting stuff if it finds its way into a court record.

Christine Sands doesn’t have a dog in the fight and the DMCA is irrelevant anyway; if any of the other ‘copyright owners’ wasn’t to have a go in the High court they can, it will only cost them £10K+ to get the ball rolling and in the circumstances will cheer the corridors of justice up immensely as they laugh each one out of court.

Remind me – was it the APD School of Bullshit or the KSC Detective College that Yolande graduated from? In other words, is this a blatant lie or is she really stupid enough to believe her own bollocks?

Speaking for myself I work in a place that audits and wraps the metadata around AS-11 files for broadcast; which does require a basic working knowledge of certain parts of the law. but I’m not, like some of my colleagues, a paralegal nor am I any kind of solicitor… I doubt if anyone else in these parts is either.

What I can tell you though is that, thanks to their ham-fisted approach, wilful ignorance of the law, often illegal actions and the fact she’s a general all-round con artist (in my considered opinion of course) the likes of Belinda McKenzie, and indeed certain other shysters who operate as ‘McKenzie friends’, much of the legal profession does hold them in utter contempt and does wish them banned. – But ermm ‘somehow’ I think they’ll choose a different mechanism from some wordpress blog as the law will need to be changed and precedent overturned!

Thanks EC… I’ll pass it along. First thoughts emerging are that he may have something to do with her own legal advisers. The theory that she’d be quite keen to be sure that Rupert does nothing to drop her or her associates in it, is also one that’s standing up.

– As you can imagine, there are many people dotted around the country who would like to see Belinda McKenzie face proper legal consequences for all her many acts of contempt for genuine truth and justice. Her straying into the realms of CSA hoaxing these past few years is particularly distasteful and offensive.

Rupert could have opted to blow the lid on the mobsters and have made a massive difference in restricting future such vile harrassment of innocent lives.He chose not to and is paying for it.

As to whether he now elects to do expose the dark arts of the likes of Belinda,Angie,Sabine et al and put the record straight only time will tell.It would make hell of a read,go viral, Speilberg may even be interested 🙂

He has plenty of time to mull this over and may just decide his existence need not be a complete vacuous pile of pointless pus after all.Certain individuals(Hi Belinda etc) will be shitting themselves about the damage Rupert could inflict if he transformed from poacher to gatekeeper.

Wow – she says that the knife comment was used in Court to say that Rupert was outside the school with a knife. I’m told it wasn’t. It’s the Daily Mail telling lies saying he had a knife outside the school. I’m informed that the issue was the fear caused by the above comment – there was no evidence offered in Court that he actually had a knife.
Facts, Deborah, facts!

Christ, well that’s 20 minutes of my lie I won’t get back listening to that mania to find out what she said…

The Mail wasn’t ‘lying’… I posted on this yesterday and explained why Rupert’s comments infer that he was indeed carrying a knife and (post verdict at least) can be construed as an admission that he was indeed armed.

Pre verdict I’d say they were close to the wind as the meaning of that exchange hadn’t yet been proved beyond any reasonable doubt; but basically it was established in court that Rupert claimed to have a knife – was anything led to establish whether he actually was armed? I don’t recall that there was, therefore we have and effective admission with nothing to refute it.

Certainly, there was nothing imagined about the fear caused by an apparently-armed man outside a school where little kids were taking their first steps in the world… Walk into a bank with a banana in your pocket, imply that it’s a gun, and try to rob a bank… You might find yourself tazered or shot as an armed robber; and even if you’re simply caught, you’ll be done for armed robbery.

In all reality, the chances of Christine “General” Sands or Neelu “What Me Crazy?” Berry even getting around to making a report to WordPress are pretty minimal.
Neelu has her hands full visiting every bank in London trying to cash in her SwissiVoodoo vouchers and Sands must be one of the most prolific Facebook posters on the planet with her rabbiting on nearly every 4 minutes with some hyperventilated rubbish.

I think she is intent on posting every single stanza from the Bible one after the other and when she’s not summoning up another Cyclone to wipe out Texas she seems to have had a dramatic about face re Julian Sands and now says he works for the CIA. Wasn’t she arrested outside Assange’s Embassy protesting on his behalf?.

You can just image the report the pair would author & file to WordPress : it would probably contain threats to summon up Fire & Brimstone if they dared to defy the two Raving Mad Loonies.

She and her army of Orcs are going on the warpath. Needs reporting to the New Zealand authorities in case she ever decides to travel to the UK. She’s not just going to bring a bread & butter knife like Rupes, rather an AK4 and a suitcase full of ammunition.

There is something seriously wrong that people like her can issue blatant death threats repeatedly and not get picked up for questioning let alone be allowed to have her threats survive on the net.
Same goes for Sands & Berry.

“Strong language advisory: Another video for Hoaxted trolls to ‘dislike’. Basically, Hoaxtead trolls have actively conspired by their online spy networks, to get Rupert arrested, charged and Jailed. Meanwhile, police can do NOTHING for myself, toward arrested THEM for their malicious slanders and online abuse against those like myself, who are simply asking for UK children’s rights to JUSTICE ??? I smell RATS.”

Fnord, the mainstream media is perfectly acceptable when it suits them!

And Mad Moo appears to have got ALL her info’ about the case from that one brief article written after the first day of an 8-day trial! Hence why she thinks that one Facebook comment was all RQ was on trial for.

Um….I have some important news re the children’s father. I believe he’s a vegan; not sure about the yoga, but I think I remember hearing something about him being a practitioner. Ergo, he must be innocent. Case closed, Debs!

Yes, we do predict that there could be consequences for the Hoaxtead mobsters’ behaviour, and that these consequences could involve the police, courts, and an unnaturally large amount of porridge. This is hardly “threatening”—more like “warning”. The fact that these gimboids universally refuse to acknowledge or act upon our warnings, and thus get themselves into terribly hot water, is hardly our fault.

I don’t see what her problem is, she is always going on about how all she wants is a proper investigation, that’s all. Well they did a thorough investigation on Rupert lasting months that must have cost a fortune. He was found guilty by a jury of people and that’s called justice. She and her friends will never accept any verdict that doesn’t say what they want and even if the children speak up one day they will turn on them. This woman is a fanatic.

“They go to such extremes” like setting up a website so it “shows what they truly are” (ie: guilty) so Deborah “Moo” Mahmoudieh goes to the extreme of setting up a Youtube channel which, err shows what she truly is as innocent people don’t behave like that.
Now I’ve confused myself.

And this corker : “I’ve never once attacked , trolled etc etc yadda yadda”.
Mad as a fucking meat axe.

They’ve all forgotten each other.
Last time some of the remnants got together was to cheer on some Russian sitting on a politician’s roof and screeching his “hooman rights” were being withheld because the coppers refused to lay on a 3 course candle-lit supper with a bottle of fine wine.

Maybe they’ll come together again for Neelu “Hang all Judges” Berry’s eviction. Doubt it though.

The World just doesn’t work the way that Mad Moo wants it to, does it? How on Earth does the poor cow cope with simple day-to-day tasks? For instance, check out this hidden footage of her attempting to buy a book. At least I think it’s her – the American accent is fooling no one…

I’m pretty sure that if I made a couple of videos a week calling innocent people paedophiles for around two years, I may face some resistance. But that resistance would prove their guilt by Mad Moo’s logic, hmmmm okay. Pretty sure I would get a knock on the door for doing that, but Teflon Deirdre gets away with it, then has the nerve to complain that people are “trolling her”.

That should be the least of her worries, considering her full-time slander and defamation campaign of social services, teachers, the Police, Government, Parents and so on.